| Literature DB >> 25799547 |
Facundo Barbar1, Victoria Werenkraut1, Juan Manuel Morales1, Sergio Agustín Lambertucci1.
Abstract
Humans affect biological diversity and species distribution patterns by modifying resource availability and generating novel environments where generalist species benefit and specialist species are rare. In particular, cities create local homogenization while roads fragment habitat, although both processes can increase food availability for some species that may be able to take advantage of this new source. We studied space use by birds of prey in relation to human construction, hypothesizing that these birds would be affected even in poorly populated areas. We worked in Northwestern Patagonia, Argentina, which is experiencing a high population growth, but still having very large unpopulated areas. We related the presence of raptors with different sources of human disturbance and found that both the abundance and richness of these birds were positively associated with anthropogenic environments. These results are driven mostly by a strong association between the medium-sized generalist species and these novel environments (mainly roads and cities). This may create an imbalance in intra-guild competitive abilities, modifying the normal structures of top carnivore hierarchies. Indeed, the structure of raptor communities seems to be changing, even in poorly populated areas, with anthropogenic constructions seemingly producing changes in wild areas more promptly than thought, a cause for concern in ecosystems conservation issues.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25799547 PMCID: PMC4370498 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118851
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Relationship between the total richness of raptor species observed and the anthropogenic variable that was the most influential in our model.
Detection probabilities for all species modeled for the N-mixture approach.
| Species | Detection probability | 0,025 | 0,975 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0,01302 | 0,00650 | 0,02589 |
|
| 0,01266 | 0,00614 | 0,02591 |
|
| 0,02633 | 0,01494 | 0,04601 |
|
| 0,01495 | 0,00787 | 0,02823 |
|
| 0,01508 | 0,00762 | 0,02959 |
|
| 0,02039 | 0,01121 | 0,03680 |
|
| 0,02828 | 0,00837 | 0,09115 |
|
| 0,02046 | 0,00252 | 0,14731 |
|
| 0,01469 | 0,00284 | 0,07228 |
|
| 0,00822 | 0,00068 | 0,09110 |
|
| 0,00535 | 0,00160 | 0,01770 |
|
| - | - | - |
|
| - | - | - |
The first 6 species with lower dispersion were used for the individual analyses, while the others were discarded due the scarce records in our censuses.
Estimated values obtained from the N-mixture models applied to determine the relationship between the distance to several human constructions and the abundance of the six more abundant species.
| Primary Roads | Secondary Roads | Fences | Human Settlements | Cities | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | |
|
| -0.515** | 0.226 | -0.167 | 0.224 |
|
| 0.098 | 0.169 | -0.265 | 0.172 |
|
| -0.010 | 0.426 | -0.531 | 0.544 |
|
| -0.241 | 0.341 | -0.345 | 0.396 |
|
| -1.048** | 0.424 | 0.132 | 0.506 | -0.036 | 0.619 | 0.237 | 0.293 | - |
|
|
| - |
| -0.155 | 0.199 | -0.163 | 0.213 | 0.178 | 0.137 | -0.167 | 0.122 |
|
| 0.420 | 0.309 | -0.453 | 0.405 | -0.765 | 0.491 | - |
| -0.726** | 0.303 |
|
| -0.310 | 0.339 | - |
| -0.063 | 0.412 | -0.071 | 0.232 | -0.562** | 0.270 |
We present the estimates, standard errors (SE) and the p-value (*p≤ 0.1; **p ≤ 0.05; ***p ≤ 0.01) for every variable in the models. In bold we highlight the most influential variable for each model, which is the one used to show the relationship in the Fig. 2. As the analyses were performed with the distance to the anthropic variables, negative estimate values indicate a positive relationship (and vice versa).
Fig 2Relationship between each of the six more abundant raptor species and the anthropogenic variable that was most influential for that species in the models obtained.